Monday, September 22, 2008

Worst MVP Winners of All-Time (NL)

This post is a little overdue. I meant to have this out immediately following my “worst Cy Young winners” posts but this took much longer than I anticipated. Apologies.

The criteria for winning the Cy Young Award is pretty straight forward. Voters simply vote for the best pitchers. The criteria for the MVP Award is much more confusing and frustrating. Some choose to vote for “the best players on the best teams.” Others like to say it should go to “the player who meant the most to his team.” I will admit that ambiguity is inherent to an award titled “Most Valuable Player” rather than “Best Player.” However, I believe that the spirit of the award was for it to be given to the best player. I can see where the word “Valuable” could cause confusion but I think that was used instead of “Best” or another synonym because it sounds fancier. Remember, the award was created near the beginning of the 20th century. People cared about fanciness back then. Plus, why would the criteria for the Cy Young (an award for pitchers) be different than the MVP (an award primarily for hitters)?

Even though I understand why there might be some confusion as to what “Valuable” is supposed to mean, I do not support multiple interpretations of the criteria for winning the award. The people who think it should go to “the best player on the best team” are way off base unless, of course, that player is the best player in MLB as well. Simply being the best player on the best team is not even remotely close to an acceptable reason to award the MVP. The best player on the best team by definition isn’t as important because the team is already good. Likewise, the people who think the award should go to “the player who meant the most to his team” are way off base. People of this ilk generally dismiss players from poor teams. Ironically, those players are just the players who mean the most to their teams. Imagine how much worse a bad team would be without its best player. Great players on bad teams are usually the most “valuable” players in the league. They are surely more valuable than great players on great teams. I'm OK with using "value to team" as a tiebreaker but it's weak as the primary criteria for awarding the MVP.

So, for the purposes of this post, please understand that I believe that the MVP should be given to the best player. Voters should vote for the best players. It is the years in which they failed to vote for the “best” players that you’ll find in my list of the worst MVP winners of all-time.

Worst National League MVP Winners of All-Time(winners listed first)

2007

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Jimmy Rollins

139

30

94

41

49

.875

118

380

Matt Holliday

120

36

137

11

63

1.012

150

386

David Wright

113

30

107

34

94

.962

150

330

Prince Fielder

109

50

119

2

90

1.013

156

354

Rollins had a pretty good season but I’m not sure he had a better season than David Wright or Prince Fielder let alone Matt Holliday. Holliday was robbed. The stat-lines speak for themselves.

2000

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Jeff Kent

114

33

125

12

90

1.020

162

350

Barry Bonds

129

49

106

11

117

1.128

188

330

This was pre-70 home runs but, by many accounts, Bonds had already begun taking steroids. His numbers show it. He had his best season in nearly a decade. Nonetheless, Bonds should have easily won his fourth MVP award (which would’ve given him eight overall) in 2000. His numbers dwarfed Kent’s and they played for the same team.

1999

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Chipper Jones

116

45

110

25

126

1.074

168

359

Mark McGwire

118

65

147

0

133

1.121

177

363

I kind of feel bad for McGwire but it’s hard to feel too bad for a guy who juiced his way to the front page of every newspaper in the country. McGwire should have won at least two MVPs but ended up with zero. Chipper Jones had a very good season in ’99 but it wasn’t nearly as good as McGwire’s. McGwire led the league in home runs and RBIs. He had more HRs, RBIs, Runs, and walks than Jones and had a much better OPS.

1998

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Sammy Sosa

134

66

158

18

73

1.024

160

416

Mark McGwire

130

70

147

1

162

1.222

216

383

I never understood the results of the ’98 MVP race. It was almost as if the voters decided to give the MVP as a consolation prize to the loser of the great McGwire/Sosa home run race. McGwire had an OPS+ of 216! Sosa was 160. No player since Ted Williams was routinely hosed out of winning the MVP in the 40s and 50s had failed to win the MVP with an OPS+ of at least 216. Sosa had more runs and RBIs than McGwire but it’s important to remember that McGwire was walked 89 more times than Sosa. How many more RBIs would McGwire have had if he got as many looks as Sosa? McGwire destroyed Sosa in ’98. Few players in MLB history have had a big margin in OPS than McGwire had over Sosa and not won the MVP.

1996

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Ken Caminiti

109

40

130

11

78

1.029

173

339

Barry Bonds

122

42

129

40

151

1.076

188

318

Bonds’s reputation cost him the MVP in ’96 as it did in 2000. Caminiti didn’t deserve the award any more than Kent did in 2000. Heck, Bonds was 40-40. At the time, only Jose Canseco had accomplished 40-40. That should’ve been an automatic MVP-win. Bonds also had Caminiti beat in virtually every other statistic. This should’ve given Bonds nine MVPs. Bonds finished fifth (!!!) in the voting.

1995

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Barry Larkin

98

15

66

51

61

.886

133

244

Barry Bonds

109

33

104

31

120

1.008

168

292

Larkin is one of the least deserving MVP winners of all-time. If the player with Bonds’ numbers had been anyone else, Larkin wouldn’t have won. But, once again, Bonds was denied an MVP because of his popularity—or lack thereof. The numbers aren’t even close. Hilariously, Bonds finished 12th in the voting. Vendetta, anyone? This would’ve given Bonds 10 MVPs.

Pitcher

ERA

ERA+

W%

Innings

Wins

WHIP

K’s

Greg Maddux

1.63

262

90%

209.7

19

.81

181

If Bonds wasn’t going to win the MVP in ’95, the only other logical choice (unless you want to make a somewhat understandable case for Mike Piazza) was Greg Maddux. Maddux had one of the greatest seasons in baseball history. To suggest that Larkin was better in ’95 than Maddux is to insult the intelligence of every baseball fan in the world. Maddux went 19-2 with the fifth best ERA+ in MLB history.

1991

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Terry Pendleton

94

22

86

10

43

.880

139

303

Barry Bonds

95

25

116

43

107

.924

160

262

This was the first year Bonds was screwed out of the MVP. Pendleton’s numbers don’t even come close. This should’ve been his second overall and should’ve been his 11th total.

1988

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Kirk Gibson

106

25

76

31

73

.860

148

262

Darryl Strawberry

101

39

101

29

85

.911

165

296

As much as I love Gibby, Darryl Strawberry was the man in 1988. If not Strawberry, then it should’ve been Will Clark.

1987

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Andre Dawson

90

49

137

11

32

.896

130

353

Jack Clark

93

35

106

1

136

1.056

176

250

As I mentioned in the intro, some of these are much worse than others. This one isn’t as bad as most but Jack Clark was clearly the more feared and productive hitter. He had 104 more walks than “The Hawk”. His OPS and OPS+ were much better. Clark also played on a team where the second highest OPS+ was 105. Dawson played on a team with nine players who had an OPS+ better than 105. Clark had the better season and he was more important to his team. I’m sure a decent argument could be made that Dawson deserved the MVP but I think a better argument could be made for Clark.

1974

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Steve Garvey

95

21

111

5

31

.811

130

301

Mike Schmidt

108

36

116

23

106

.941

158

310

Garvey’s win in ’74 is one of the worst in MLB history. Schmidt has him beat in every category and most of them aren’t close. It’s unfortunate for Schmidt that he was robbed of this MVP because it would’ve given him four for his career which would have been a significant accomplishment. When Schmidt retired, nobody in MLB history had won four MVP awards. Even now, Schmidt would have been one of two players with four or more MVPs.

1973

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Pete Rose

115

5

64

10

65

.838

138

297

Willie Stargell

106

44

119

0

80

1.038

186

337

Rose won the MVP in ’73 because he led the league in hits and batting average and played for the first-place Reds. Unfortunately for “Pops”, that is a recipe that’s hard to beat even if your season is twice as impressive. Rose had 49 extra-base hits. “Pops” had 44 home runs alone. He had 90 extra-base hits. He had 55 more RBIs. This is definitely won of the worst MVP results in MLB history. This kept Stargell from becoming a two-time winner which would’ve certainly increased his already-impressive resume.

1967

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Orlando Cepeda

91

25

111

11

62

.923

164

295

Roberto Clemente

103

23

110

9

41

.954

171

324

This one is another like the ’87 NL MVP voting. It’s not horrible but I think it went to the wrong person. Clemente has Cepeda beat in OPS, OPS+, Total Bases, and RBIs+Runs. Cepeda’s advantages are razor-thin. I could’ve easily not included this one but it seems pretty obvious to me that Clemente had the better season.

1966

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Roberto Clemente

105

29

119

7

46

.896

146

342

Dick Allen

112

40

110

10

68

1.028

181

331

The ’66 NL MVP voting saw Clemente on the other side. Unlike ’67 when he lost but should’ve won, he won but should’ve lost in ’66. The only difference is that the ’66 race was much more decisive. Dick Allen destroys Clemente in a season vs. season comparison. Allen was similar to Albert Belle in the sense that he was a feared slugger who dominated baseball for ten years but was denied an MVP and ultimately election to the Hall of Fame because the writers didn’t like him.

Pitcher

ERA

ERA+

W%

Innings

Wins

WHIP

K’s

Sandy Koufax

1.73

190

75%

323

27

.99

317

Koufax had a legit claim to the MVP in ’66 as well. His numbers weren’t as good as Maddux’s in ’95 but they were pretty stellar. If Allen wasn’t going to win the MVP, it should’ve been Koufax.

1964

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Ken Boyer

100

24

119

3

70

.854

130

307

Willie Mays

121

47

111

19

82

.990

172

351

This is easily one of the worst. A comparison of Mays and Boyer’s statistics in ’64 goes something like a comparison of Mays and Boyer’s careers. Mays dominated Boyer. I really don’t have much more to add. The result is inexcusable. Get used to seeing Mays. He appears four times on this list as a player who should have won. He should have won five MVPs at a minimum.

1962

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Maury Wills

130

6

48

104

51

.720

100

259

Frank Robinson

134

39

136

18

76

1.045

173

380

Willie Mays

130

49

141

18

78

.999

165

382

Hank Aaron

127

45

128

15

66

1.008

170

366

The ’62 NL MVP results are one of the two worst of all-time in my opinion. There are other instances when players who didn’t win had equally greater stats than the eventual winners as the ’62 group. However, there has never been an instance where three of the greatest players of all-time had unbelievable seasons and all lost to a weak player. It’s astonishing. Just look at the numbers Aaron, Mays, and Robinson put up. Then look at Wills. I’m getting fired-up just talking about this. Wills had an OPS+ of 100. By definition, that means he was simply average in ’62. How did he end up beating three phenomenal seasons?

1960

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Dick Groat

85

2

50

0

39

.765

110

226

Willie Mays

29

103

25

61

.936

159

330

The fact that Willie Mays didn’t win the NL MVP in ’60 is ridiculous. The fact that Dick Groat did is just silly. It’s really not worth discussing since the chart pretty much paints the picture. Mays even played 15 more games than Groat.

1959

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Ernie Banks

97

45

143

2

64

.970

155

351

Hank Aaron

116

39

123

8

51

1.037

181

400

Banks had a very good season in ’59 but Aaron was considerably better. He had huge advantages in Total Bases, OPS, and OPS+.

1956

Pitcher

ERA

ERA+

W%

Innings

Wins

WHIP

K’s

Don Newcombe

3.06

132

79%

268

27

.99

139

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Hank Aaron

106

26

92

2

37

.923

151

340

There have been a litany of pitchers in baseball who have put up the numbers Newcombe put up in ’56 and never came close to the MVP. Pitchers should win the MVP under two conditions; 1). There season was historically good and 2). There aren’t any obvious hitting candidates. Neither applied to the ’62 NL MVP race. The voters didn’t see it that way, though. Seven different players received first place votes and none of them went to Hank Aaron.

1955

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Roy Campanella

81

32

107

2

56

.978

153

260

Willie Mays

123

51

127

24

79

1.059

174

382

Campanella won three MVPs but probably should have won only one. Mays clearly outperformed Campy in ’55. I realize that, for a catcher, Campanella had a magnificent season. However, there is no way that his defense from the catching position or the offense that he provided above and beyond the average catcher was enough to offset the remarkable season that Mays had.

1951

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Roy Campanella

90

33

108

1

53

.983

159

298

Stan Musial

124

32

108

4

98

1.063

182

355

Ditto. Musial should’ve won three more MVPs than he did which would’ve given him six.

1950

Pitcher

ERA

ERA+

W%

Innings

Wins

WHIP

K’s

Jim Konstanty

2.66

152

70%

152

16

1.04

56

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Stan Musial

105

28

109

5

87

1.033

163

331

Konstanty’s season should not have been good enough to win the award over Musial. In fact, Konstanty wasn’t even the best pitcher in the NL in 1950. He only pitched 150 innings. Robin Roberts pitched twice as many innings with a pretty damn good ERA+. Sal Maglie pitched 50 more innings with a nearly identical ERA+, more wins, and a better winning percentage.

1949

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Jackie Robinson

122

16

124

37

86

.960

152

313

Ralph Kiner

116

54

127

6

117

1.090

186

361

Robinson was good in ’49 but Kiner was flat-out robbed. He led the league in home runs, OPS, RBIs, walks, and slugging percentage. Baseball writers must have had a grudge against Kiner because he didn’t receive a single first place vote while six other players did.

1947

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Bob Elliot

93

22

113

3

87

.927

147

287

Ralph Kiner

118

51

127

1

98

1.056

173

361

Kiner was robbed even worse in ’47 because at least Jackie Robinson led the league in something in ’49. Bob Elliot won the MVP without leading the league in anything. Kiner led the league in home runs, OPS, slugging %, total bases, and runs created. Again, Kiner didn’t receive a single first place vote while 10 others did.

1945

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Phil Cavaretta

94

6

97

5

81

.949

166

249

Tommy Holmes

125

28

117

15

70

.997

175

367

I hadn’t heard of either of these dudes before looking this stuff up but there were some shenanigans going on in the ’45 voting. Holmes drove in and scored 51 more runs than Cavaretta. He had 118 more total bases. This was one of the worst votes of all-time…

1944

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Marty Marion

52

6

63

1

43

.686

91

183

Stan Musial

112

12

94

7

90

.989

175

312

…but not the worst. That has to go to the ’44 NL MVP vote. If it was a joke, it wasn’t funny. Marion didn’t even have a 100 OPS+ which I believe makes him the only non-pitcher in MLB history to win the award with less than a 100 OPS+. Musial destroyed him in every category. Marion wasn’t a decisive winner garnering only 7 of 24 first place votes but voters probably had their own agendas and that cost Musial—clearly the best player in the league—another MVP.

1940

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Frank McCormick

93

19

127

2

52

.849

132

298

Johnny Mize

111

43

137

7

82

1.040

176

368

Mize doesn’t get near the fanfare as he should and some of that has to do with the fact that he was robbed out of two MVP awards. In 1940, he led the league in OPS, slugging percentage, total bases, home runs, RBIs, and runs created. McCormick led the league in hits and doubles. Go figure.

1939

Pitcher

ERA

ERA+

W%

Innings

Wins

WHIP

K’s

Bucky Walters

2.29

168

71%

319

27

1.13

137

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Johnny Mize

104

28

108

0

92

1.070

178

353

Mize was just as good in ’39. He led the league in batting average, home runs, OPS, slugging %, runs created, and total bases. The ’39 result wasn’t nearly as bad as in ’40 because Bucky Walters led the league in virtually all pitching statistics. He had a very good season.

1938

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Ernie Lombardi

60

19

95

0

40

.915

153

256

Mel Ott

116

36

116

2

118

1.025

178

307

Mel Ott and Johnny Mize were easily the two best hitters in the NL in 1938. Naturally, they received a combined zero first place votes. They combined to lead the league in virtually all major statistics. Ernie Lombardi led the league in batting average. Whoop dee doo.

1935

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Gabby Hartnett

67

13

91

1

41

.949

151

225

Arky Vaughan

108

19

99

4

97

1.098

190

303

This probably had something to do with the precedent that catchers can win the award with inferior statistics simply because they are catchers. Vaughan clearly has the advantage in every statistic.

1931

Player

Runs

HR

RBIs

SB

BB

OPS

OPS+

TB

Frankie Frisch

96

4

82

28

45

.764

102

205

Chuck Klein

121

31

121

7

59

.982

152

347

1931 is generally considered the year in which the MVP began as we know it now. Before ’31, the MVP voting process was a joke. Unfortunately, the ’31 voting process was a joke as well. Frisch over Klein was not a good way to begin the “new and improved” voting process.

The 2008 NL MVP Race

Just like the 2006 NL Race, the ’08 race comes down to Albert Pujols and Ryan Howard. In ’06, Howard had a phenomenal two months (23 home runs and 62 RBIs) to overtake Pujols. Phat Albert’s numbers were better than Howard’s but Howard’s surge to end the season led the Phillies into the playoffs. The exact same scenario is unfolding in the NL this year. Howard has been scorching over the last two months leading the Phillies back into another likely playoff appearance. There are two differences from ’06, though: 1) Pujols and the Cardinals will not be in the playoffs and; 2) Howard’s OPS+ is only 120 compared to 167 in ’06. Maybe those factors will cancel each other out and we’ll see Howard over Pujols again. While I was fine with Howard over Pujols in ’06 (in fact, I wrote a post supporting that outcome), I wouldn’t be supportive of if it happened again this year. Pujols has a 184-120 advantage in OPS+. He has a .633-.533 advantage in slugging percentage. He has a .453-.336 advantage in OBP. Pujols has nearly a 2 to 1 BB:K ratio. Howard is much worse than 1 to 2. The numbers are there for Pujols. His team won’t make the playoffs but he deserves the MVP. Here is a guess at how the voting might turn out…

Rich Rod has taken superior talent and turned Michigan into a mid-level MAC team. Michigan been in the Top 10 in recruiting over the past 5 years. The team should be on in transition not a total rebuild. The world Millen come to mind.

I know everyone thinks it is just a one-year thing. But winning next year with a true freshman QB or Threets is a recipe for another marginal year. If the new QB does not turn into a Pat White, the Rich Rob experiment will be over and the program will be starting over - again.